Successfully reported this slideshow.

×

# CVPR2010: higher order models in computer vision: Part 1, 2

## More Related Content

### CVPR2010: higher order models in computer vision: Part 1, 2

1. 1. Tractable Higher Order Models in Computer Vision Carsten Rother Sebastian Nowozin Microsoft Research Cambridge
2. 2. Schedule 830-900 Introduction 900-1000 Models: small cliques and special potentials 1000-1030 Tea break 1030-1200 Inference: Relaxation techniques: LP, Lagrangian, Dual Decomposition 1200-1230 Models: global potentials and global parameters + discussion
3. 3. A gentle intro to MRFs Goal z = (R,G,B)n x = {0,1}n Given z and unknown (latent) variables x : P(x|z) = P(z|x) P(x) / P(z) ~ P(z|x) P(x) Posterior Likelihood Prior Probability (data- (data- dependent) independent) Maximium a Posteriori (MAP): x* = argmax P(x|z) x
4. 4. Likelihood P(x|z) ~ P(z|x) P(x) Green Green Red Red
5. 5. Likelihood P(x|z) ~ P(z|x) P(x) Log P(zi|xi=0) P(zi|xi=1) Maximum likelihood: x* = argmax P(z|x) = X argmax ∏ P(zi|xi) x xi
6. 6. Prior P(x|z) ~ P(z|x) P(x) xi xj P(x) = 1/f ∏ θij (xi,xj) i,j Є N f = ∑ ∏ θij (xi,xj) “partition function” x i,j Є N θij (xi,xj) = exp{-|xi-xj|} “ising prior” (exp{-1}=0.36; exp{0}=1)
7. 7. Prior Pure Prior model: P(x) = 1/f ∏ exp{-|xi-xj|} i,j Є N Solutions with Faire Samples highest probability (mode) P(x) = 0.011 P(x) = 0.012 P(x) = 0.012 Smoothness prior needs the likelihood
8. 8. Weight prior and likelihood w =0 w =10 w =40 w =200 E(x,z,w) = ∑ θi (xi,zi) + w∑ θij (xi,xj)
9. 9. Posterior distribution P(x|z) ~ P(z|x) P(x) “Gibbs” distribution: P(x|z) = 1/f(z,w) exp{-E(x,z,w)} E(x,z,w) = ∑ θi (xi,zi) + w∑ θij (xi,xj) Energy i i,j Unary terms Pairwise terms θi (xi,zi) = P(zi|xi=1) xi + P(zi|xi=0) (1-xi) Likelihood θij (xi,xj) = |xi-xj| prior
10. 10. Energy minization P(x|z) = 1/f(z,w) exp{-E(x,z,w)} f(z,w) = ∑ exp{-E(x,z,w)} X -log P(x|z) = -log (1/f(z,w)) + E(x,z,w) x* = argmin E(x,z,w) MAP same as minimum Energy X MAP; Global min E ML
11. 11. Random Field Models for Computer Vision Inference: Model :  Variables: discrete or continuous?  Combinatorial optimization: e.g. Graph Cut  If discrete: how many labels?  Message Passing: e.g. BP, TRW  Space: discrete or continuous?  Iterated Conditional Modes (ICM)  Dependences between variables?  LP-relaxation: e.g. Cutting-plane  How many variables?  Problem decomposition + subgradient  …  … Applications:  2D/3D Image segmentation Learning:  Object Recognition  Exhaustive search (grid search)  3D reconstruction  Pseudo-Likelihood approximation  Stereo / optical flow  Image denoising  Training in Pieces  Texture Synthesis  Max-margin  Pose estimation  …  Panoramic Stitching  …
12. 12. Introducing Factor Graphs Write probability distributions as Graphical model: - Direct graphical model - Undirected graphical model “traditionally used for MRFs” - Factor graphs “best way to visualize the underlying energy” References: - Pattern Recognition and Machine Learning *Bishop ‘08, book, chapter 8+ - several lectures at the Machine Learning Summer School 2009 (see video lectures)
13. 13. Factor Graphs P(x) ~ θ(x1,x2,x3) θ(x2,x4) θ(x3,x4) θ(x3,x5) “4 factors” P(x) ~ exp{-E(x)} Gibbs distribution E(x) = θ(x1,x2,x3) + θ(x2,x4) + θ(x3,x4) + θ(x3,x5) unobserved x1 x2 variables are in same factor. x3 x4 x5 Factor graph
14. 14. Definition “Order” x x2 1 Definition “Order”: The arity (number of variables) of the largest factor x3 x4 Factor graph P(X) ~ θ(x1,x2,x3) θ(x2,x4) θ(x3,x4) θ(x3,x5) with order 3 x5 arity 3 arity 2 Triple clique x1 x2 Extras: • I will use “factor” and “clique” in the same way • Not fully correct since clique may or may not decompose x3 x4 • Definition of “order” same for clique and factor • Markov Property: Random Field with low-order Undirected factors/cliques. model x5
15. 15. Random Fields in Vision 4-connected; higher(8)-connected; MRF with Higher-order MRF pairwise MRF pairwise MRF global variables E(x) = ∑ θij (xi,xj) E(x) = ∑ θij (xi,xj) E(x) = ∑ θij (xi,xj) E(x) = ∑ θij (xi,xj) i,j Є N4 i,j Є N8 i,j Є N8 i,j Є N4 +θ(x1,…,xn) Order 2 Order 2 Order 2 Order n
16. 16. 4-connected: Segmentation E(x) = ∑ θi (xi,zi) + ∑ θij (xi,xj) i i,j Є N4 Observed variable Unobserved variable zi xj xi Factor graph
17. 17. 4-connected: Segmentation (CRF) E(x) = ∑ θi (xi,zi) + ∑ θij (xi,xj,zi,zj) i i,j Є N4 Observed variable zjj Unobserved (latent) variable zii z xjj xji Factor graph MRF Conditional Random Field (CRF) no pure prior
18. 18. 4-connected: Stereo matching Image – left(a) Image – right(b) Ground truth depth [Boykov et al. ‘01+ • Images rectified • Ignore occlusion for now Energy: di E(d): {0,…,D-1}n → R Labels: d (depth/shift)
19. 19. Random Fields in Vision 4-connected; higher(8)-connected; MRF with Higher-order MRF pairwise MRF pairwise MRF global variables E(x) = ∑ θij (xi,xj) E(x) = ∑ θij (xi,xj) E(x,) = ∑ θij (xi,xj) E(x) = ∑ θij (xi,xj) i,j Є N4 i,j Є N8 i,j Є N8 i,j Є N4 +θ(x1,…,xn) Order 2 Order 2 Order 2 Order n
20. 20. Highly-connect: Discretization artefacts 4-connected 8-connected Euclidean Euclidean higher-connectivity can model true Euclidean length *Boykov et al. ‘03; ‘05+
21. 21. 3D reconstruction [Slide credits: Daniel Cremers]
22. 22. Stereo with occlusion E(d): {1,…,D}2n → R Each pixel is connected to D pixels in the other image Ground truth Stereo with occlusion Stereo without occlusion *Kolmogrov et al. ‘02+ *Boykov et al. ‘01+
23. 23. Texture De-noising Training images Test image Test image (60% Noise) Result MRF Result MRF Result MRF 4-connected 4-connected 9-connected (neighbours) (7 attractive; 2 repulsive)
24. 24. Random Fields in Vision 4-connected; higher(8)-connected; MRF with Higher-order MRF pairwise MRF pairwise MRF global variables E(x) = ∑ θij (xi,xj) E(x) = ∑ θij (xi,xj) E(x,) = ∑ θij (xi,xj) E(x) = ∑ θij (xi,xj) i,j Є N4 i,j Є N8 i,j Є N8 i,j Є N4 +θ(x1,…,xn) Order 2 Order 2 Order 2 Order n
25. 25. Reason 4: Use Non-local parameters: Interactive Segmentation (GrabCut) *Boykov and Jolly ’01+ GrabCut *Rother et al. ’04+
26. 26. MRF with Global parameters: Interactive Segmentation (GrabCut) w Model jointly segmentation and color model: E(x,w): {0,1}n x {GMMs}→ R E(x,w) = ∑ θi (xi,w) + ∑ θij (xi,xj) i i,j Є N4 An object is a compact set of colors: Red Red *Rother et al Siggraph ’04+
27. 27. Latent/Hidden CRFs “instance” • ObjCut Kumar et. al. ‘05, Deformable Part Model Felzenszwalb et al., CVPR “instance ’08; PoseCut Bray et al. ’06, LayoutCRF label” Winn et al. ’06 • Hidden variable are never observed “parts” (either training or test), e.g. parts • Maximizing over hidden variables • ML: Deep Belief Networks, Restricted Booltzman machine [Hinton et al.] (often sampling is done) [LayoutCRF Winn et al. ’06+
28. 28. Random Fields in Vision 4-connected; higher(8)-connected; MRF with Higher-order MRF pairwise MRF pairwise MRF global variables E(x) = ∑ θij (xi,xj) E(x) = ∑ θij (xi,xj) E(x,) = ∑ θij (xi,xj) E(x) = ∑ θij (xi,xj) i,j Є N4 i,j Є N8 i,j Є N8 i,j Є N4 +θ(x1,…,xn) Order 2 Order 2 Order 2 Order n
29. 29. First Example User input Standard MRF: with connectivity: Ising prior: Ising prior: * Smoothing boundary * Smoothing boundary * Removes noise E(x) = P(x) + h(x) with h(x)= { ∞ if not 4-connected 0 otherwise This Tutorial: 1. What higher-order models have been used in vision? 2. How is MAP inference done for those models? 3. Relationship between higher-order MRFs and MRFs with global variables?
30. 30. Inference (very brief summary) • Message Passing Techniques (BP, TRW, TRW-S) – Defined on the factor graph ([Potetz ’07, Lan ‘06+) – Can be applied to any model (in theory) (higher order, multi-label) • LP-relaxation: (… more in part III) – Relax original problem ({0,1} to [0,1]) and solve with existing techniques (e.g. sub-gradient) – Can be applied any model (dep. on solver used) – Connections to TRW (message passing)
31. 31. Inference (very brief summary) • Dual/Problem Decomposition (… more in part III) – Decompose (NP-)hard problem into tractable once. Solve with sub-gradient – Can be applied any model (dep. on solver used) • Combinatorial Optimization: (… more in part II) – Binary, Pairwise MRF: Graph cut, BHS (QPBO) – Multiple label, pairwise: move-making; transformation – Binary, higher-order factors: transformation – Multi-label, higher-order factors: move-making + transformation
32. 32. Inference higher-oder models (very brief summary) • Arbitrary potentials are only tractable for order <7 (memory, computation time) • For ≥7 potentials need some structure to be exploited in order to make them tractable
33. 33. Forthcoming book! Advances in Markov Random Fields for Computer Vision (Blake, Kohli, Rother) • MIT Press (probably end of 2010) • Most topics of this course and much, much more • Contributors: usual suspects: Editors + Boykov, Kolmogorov, Weiss, Freeman, Komodiakis, ....
34. 34. Schedule 830-900 Introduction 900-1000 Models: small cliques and special potentials 1000-1030 Tea break 1030-1200 Inference: Relaxation techniques: LP, Lagrangian, Dual Decomposition 1200-1230 Models: global potentials and discussion
35. 35. Small cliques (<7) (and transformation approach)
36. 36. Optimization: Binary, Pairwise E(x) = ∑ θi (xi) + ∑ θij (xi,xj) xj ϵ {0,1} i i,j Є N Submodular: • θij (0,0) + θij (1,1) ≤ θij (0,1) + θij (1,0) • Condition holds naturally for many vision problems (e.g. segmentation: |xi-xj|) • Graph cut computes efficiently the global optimum (~0.5sec for 1MPixel *Boykov, Kolmogorov ‘01+ ) Non-Submolduar: • BHS algorithm (also called QPBO algorithm) ([Borors, Hammer, and Sun ’91, Kolmogrov et al. ‘07+) Graph cut on a special graph: Output ,0,1,’?’-; • Partial optimality (various solutions for ‘?’ nodes) • Solves underlying LP-relaxation • Quality depends on application (see *Rother et al CVPR ‘07+) • Extensions exists QPBOP, QPBOI (see [Rother et al CVPR ’07, Woodford et al. ‘08+)
37. 37. Optimization: Binary, Pairwise f(x1,x2) = θ11x1x2 + θ10x1(1-x2) + θ01(1-x1)x2 + θ00(1-x1)(1-x2) f(x1,x2) = ax1x2 + bx1 + cx2 + d Quadratic Pseudo-Boolean optimization (QPBO): B2 → R Reminder : Encoding for graph-cut a cut gives s a labelling (energy) Θ11 all weights are positive if submodular (re-parameterization to Θ01 - Θ00 normal form) x1 x2 Θ10 – Θ11 Θ00 t
38. 38. Optimization: binary, higher-order f(x1,x2,x3) = θ111x1x2x3 + θ110x1x2(1-x3) + θ101x1(1-x2)x3 + … f(x1,x2,x3) = ax1x2x3 + bx1x2 + cx2x3… + 1 Quadratic polynomial can be done Idea: transform 2+ order terms into 2nd order terms Methods: 1. transformation by “substitution” 2. transformation by “min. selection”
39. 39. Transformation by “substitution” *Rosenberg ’75, Boros and Hammer ’02, Ali et al. ECCV ‘08+ f(x1,x2,x3) = x1x2x3 + x1x2 + x2 Auxiliary function: D(x1,x2,z) = x1x2 – 2x1z – 2x2z + 3z z ϵ {0,1} It is: D(x1,x2,z) = 0 if x1x2 = z D(x1,x2,z) > 0 if x1x2 ≠ z “Substitution”: f(x1,x2,x3) = min g(x1,x2,x3,z) = zx3 + z + x2 + K D(x1,x2,z) z Since K very large then x1x2 = z Apply it recursively …. Problem: • Doesn’t work in practice *Ishikawa CVPR ‘09+ • function D is non-submodular and “K enforces this strongly”
40. 40. Transformation by “min. selection” [Freedman and Drineas ’05, Kolmogorov and Zabhi ’04, Ishikawa ’09+ f(x1,x2,x3) = ax1x2x3 Useful : -x1x2x3 = min –z(x1+x2+x3-2) z ϵ {0,1} z Check: - all x1,x2,x3 = 1 then z=1 - Otherwise z=0 Transform: Case a<0: f(x1,x2,x3) = min –az (x1+x2+x3-2) z Case a>0: f(x1,x2,x3) = min a{z(x1+x2+x3-1)+(x1x2+x2x3+x3x1)-(x1+x2+x3+1)} z (similar trick)
41. 41. Transformation by “min. selection” The general case: with nd = floor(d-1/2) many new variables w From *Ishikawa PAMI ’09+
42. 42. Full Procedure *Ishikawa ‘09+ General 5-order potential: f(x1,x2,x3) = ax1x2x3x4x5 + bx1x2x3x4 + c x1x2x3x5 + d x1x2x4x5 + … … transform all 2+ degree terms are only degree 2 terms • Worst case exponential: potential order 5 gives up to 15 new variables. • Probably tractable for up to order 6 • May get very hard to solve (non-submodular) • Code available online on Ishikawa’s webpage
43. 43. Application 1: De-noising with Field-of-Experts [Roth and Black ’05, Ishikawa ‘09+ z E(X) = ∑ (zi-xi)2 / 2σ2 + ∑ ∑ αk (1+ 0.5(Jk xc)2) i c k Unary FoE prior liklihood x xc set of nxn patches (here 2x2) Jk set of filters: non-convex optimization problem How to handle continuous labels in discrete MRF? From *Ishikawa PAMI ’09, Roth et al ‘05+
44. 44. Solve with fusion move *Lempitsky et al ICCV ’07, ’08, ‘10, Woodford et al. ‘08+ Fusion move optimization: 1. X = arbitrary labelling X’ (use BHS algorithm) initial X’ 2. E’(X’) = binary MRF ● = = for fusion with proposal X’=0 X’=1 3. go to 2) if energy went down “Alpha expansion” Final X’ X’=1
45. 45. Application 1: De-noising with Field-of-Experts [Lempitsky et al ICCV ’07, ’08, ‘10, Woodford et al. ‘08] Properties of fusion move: 1. Performance depends on performance of BHS algorithm (labelled nodes) 2. Guarantee: E goes not up 3. In practice often labelled nodes. Because: θij (0,0) + θij (1,1) ≤ θij (0,1) + θij (1,0) “often low cost” X’=0 X’=1
46. 46. noisy Results original Pairwise-model Result: PSNR/E: “Factor Graph: BP based” Pairwise-model TV-norm (continuous model) FoE From *Ishikawa PAMI ’09+
47. 47. Results Comparison with “substitution”: Blur & random 0.0002% labelled From *Ishikawa PAMI ’09+
48. 48. Application 2: Curvature in stereo *Woodford et al CVPR ‘08+ f(x1,x2,x3) = x1 -2x2 + x3where xi ϵ {0,…,D} depth Example: slanted plane: f(1,2,3)=0 image Pair-wise Triple terms From *Woodford et al. CVPR ’08+
49. 49. Application 3: Higher-Order Likelihood for optical flow *Glocker et al. ECCV ‘10+ Image 1 Image 2 • Pair-wise MRF: Likelihood in unaries as NCC cost: approximation error! • Higher-order likelihood: done with triple cliques (ideally higher) One image Bi-layer triangulation Optical flow • Also use 3/4-order term to not penalize any affine motion
50. 50. Any size, Special potentials (and transformation approach)
51. 51. Label-Cost Potential [Hoiem et al. ’07, Delong et al. ’10, Bleyer et al. ‘10+ Image Grabcut-style result With cost for each new label *Delong et al. ’10+ (Same function as [Zhu and Yuille ‘96+) Label cost = 10c Label cost = 4c E(x) = P(x) + ∑ cl [ p: xp= l ] E: {1,…,L}n → R E “pairwise l Є L “Label cost” MRF” Basic idea: penalize the complexity of the model • Minimum description length (MDL) • Bayesian information criterion (BIC) • Akaike information criteriorn (AIC) From *Delong et al. ’10+
52. 52. How is it done … In an alpha expansion step: a b b c b ● a a a a a x’= 0 x’= 1 example 1: 1 0 1 1 1 a b a a a Cost for b: cb x’ example 2: 0 1 1 0 1 a a a c a Cost for b: 0 x’ Formally: E(x’) = P(x’) + ∑ (cl – cl Π x’p) p Є Pl lЄL Case a<0: a Πxi = min aw (∑xi - |Pl|+1) Submodular! p Є Pl w i From *Delong et al. ’10+
53. 53. Application: Model fitting *Delong et al. ‘10+ No MRF
54. 54. Example: surface-based stereo *Bleyer et al. ‘10+ 3D scene explained by a small set of 3D surfaces Left Image surfaces depth surfaces depth No Label With Label Cost prior Cost prior
55. 55. Example: 3DLayout CRF: Recognition and Segmentation [Hoiem et. al ‘07+ Result s with instance cost
56. 56. Robust(Soft) P n Potts model *Kohli et. al. CVPR ‘07, ‘08, PAMI ’08, IJCV ‘09+
57. 57. Image Segmentation n = number of pixels E: {0,1}n → R E(X) = ∑ ci xi + ∑ dij |xi-xj| 0 →fg, 1→bg i i,j Image Unary Cost Segmentation [Boykov and Jolly ‘ 01] [Blake et al. ‘04] [Rother et al.`04]
58. 58. Pn Potts Potentials Patch Dictionary (Tree) h(Xp) = { 0 if xi = 0, i ϵ p Cmax otherwise p Cmax  0 [slide credits: Kohli]
59. 59. Pn Potts Potentials n = number of pixels E: {0,1}n → R 0 →fg, 1→bg E(X) = ∑ ci xi + ∑ dij |xi-xj| + ∑ hp (Xp) i i,j p h(Xp) = { 0 if xi = 0, i ϵ p Cmax otherwise p [slide credits: Kohli]
60. 60. Image Segmentation n = number of pixels E: {0,1}n → R 0 →fg, 1→bg E(X) = ∑ ci xi + ∑ dij |xi-xj| + ∑ hp (Xp) i i,j p Image Pairwise Segmentation Final Segmentation [slide credits: Kohli]
61. 61. Application: Recognition and Segmentation Image One super- another super- pixelization pixelization Unaries only Pairwise CRF only Pn Potts TextonBoost *Shotton et al. ‘06+ *Shotton et al. ‘06+ from [Kohli et al. ‘08]
62. 62. Robust(soft) Pn Potts model h(xp) = { 0 if xi = 0, i ϵ p f(∑xp) otherwise p p Pn Potts Robust Pn Potts from [Kohli et al. ‘08]
63. 63. Application: Recognition and Segmentation Image One super- another super- pixelization pixelization Unaries only Pairwise CRF only Pn Potts robust Pn Potts robust Pn Potts TextonBoost *Shotton et al. ‘06+ (different f) *Shotton et al. ‘06+ From [Kohli et al. ‘08]
64. 64. Same idea for surface-based stereo *Bleyer ‘10+ One input Ground truth Stereo with Stereo with image depth hard-segmentation robust Pn Potts This approach gets best result on Middlebury Teddy image-pair:
65. 65. How is it done… Most general binary function: H (X) = F ( ∑ xi ) concave H (X) 0 ∑ xi The transformation is to a submodular pair-wise MRF, hence optimization globally optimal [slide credits: Kohli]
66. 66. Higher order to Quadratic • Start with Pn Potts model: f(x) = { 0 if all xi = 0 C1 otherwise x ϵ {0,1}n min f(x) = min C1a + C1 (1-a) ∑xi x x,a ϵ {0,1} Higher Order Quadratic Submodular Function Function ∑xi = 0 f(x) = 0 a=0 ∑xi > 0 f(x) = C1 a=1 [slide credits: Kohli]
67. 67. Higher order to Quadratic min f(x) = min C1a + C1 (1-a) ∑xi x x,a ϵ {0,1} Higher Order Function Quadratic Submodular Function C1∑xi C1 1 2 3 ∑xi [slide credits: Kohli]
68. 68. Higher order to Quadratic min f(x) = min C1a + C1 (1-a) ∑xi x x,a ϵ {0,1} Higher Order Quadratic Submodular Submodular Function Function C1∑xi a=0 a=1 Lower envelop of concave C1 functions is concave 1 2 3 ∑xi [slide credits: Kohli]
69. 69. Higher order to Quadratic min f(x) x = min f1 (x)a + f2(x) (1-a) x,a ϵ {0,1} Higher Order Quadratic Submodular Submodular Function Function f2(x) f1(x) Lower envelop of concave functions is concave 1 2 3 ∑xi [slide credits: Kohli]
70. 70. Higher order to Quadratic min f(x) x = min f1 (x)a + f2(x) (1-a) x,a ϵ {0,1} Higher Order Quadratic Submodular Submodular Function Function f2(x) + a=0 a=1 f1(x) Lower envelop = of concave functions is concave 1 2 3 ∑xi Arbitrary concave functions: sum potentials up (each breakpoint adds a new binary variable) *Vicente et al. ‘09+ [slide credits: Kohli]
71. 71. Beyond Pn Potts … soft Pattern-based Potentials *Rother et al. ’08, Komodikis et al. ‘08+ Motivation: binary image de-noising Result pairwise-MRF Higher-order MRF Training Test with 9-connected Image Image noise (7 attractive; 2 repulsive) Higher Order Structure not Preserved
72. 72. Sparse higher-order functions Minimize: E(X) = P(X) + ∑ hc (Xc) c Where: hc: {0,1}|c| → R Higher Order Function (|c| = 10x10 = 100) Assigns cost to 2100 possible labellings! Exploit function structure to transform it to a Pairwise function
73. 73. How this can be done… One clique, one pattern: hc(x) = { 0 if xc = P0 k otherwise P0 hc(x) = min ka + k(1-b) – ka(1-b) + k ∑ (1-a)xi + k ∑ b(1-xi) a,b i ϵ S0(P0) i ϵ S1(P0) Check it: 1. Pattern off => a=1,b=0 (cost k) k 2. Patter on => a=0, b=1 (cost 0) k Problem: 1. Term: “kab” is non-submodular k k 2. Only BP, TRW worked for inference -k k General Potential: Add all terms up
74. 74. Soft multi-label Pattern-based P1 P2 P3 P patterns (multi-label) P soft deviation functions w1 w2 w3 Function per clique: hc(x) = min {min ka + ∑ wia [xi ≠ Pa(i)] , kmax} a ϵ {1,…,L} i
75. 75. How it is done… Function per clique: hc(x) = min {min ka + ∑ wia [xi ≠ Pa(i)] , kmax} a ϵ {1,…,L} i z With a pattern-switching variable z: hc(xc) = min f(z) + ∑ g(z,xi) z ϵ {1,…,L+1} iϵc { ka if z = a f(z) = kmax if z = L+1 g(z,xi) = { wia if z = a and xi ≠ Pa(i) 0 if z = L+1 We use BP for optimization, since submodular and other solvers inferior
76. 76. Results: Multi-label Training; 256 labels Test; 256 labels Test + noise; 256 labels Pairwise (15 label) 10 10x10 Hard Pattern (15 label) 10 10x10 Soft Pattern (15 label) (5.6sec; BP 10iter.) (48sec; BP 10iter.) (48sec; BP 10iter.)
77. 77. Standard Patch-based MRFs [Learning Low-Level Vision, Freeman IJCV ‘04+ Multi-label xj xl xi xk E(x) = U(x) + P(x) E: {1,…,L}n → R measures patch overlap Not all labels possible (comparison still to be done)
78. 78. IMPORTANT Tea break!